ZDoom

by **Your Name Is** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 9:38 am

Plus, randy, what if its somethin like Void thats being played with .63a because Void doesn't run properly on new versions.

by **Chris** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 9:31 pm

Except, how do you decide when to suggest the user upgrade?

After a while of testing. Like, say, if you release it, make a note on the forums, and after a week or so there's no noteable problems. No, it wouldn't be perfect, but then again, nothing would be.

by **randi** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:54 pm

This really went off on a tangent, so I split the topic and put the remainder in off-topic.

In regard to the original feature suggestion, it wouldn't be too hard since I already have some simple web client code written. Except, how do you decide when to suggest the user upgrade? Immediately when a new version is available is often not a good idea for somebody who doesn't know any better. I'd rather leave that decision up to them.

by **Cptschrodinger** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 3:58 pm

Note the

in the post...

by **jallamann** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 3:37 pm

So, "checking for updates" = steam?

I thought "disallowing to play without", "violation against license to circumvent", "YOU NEED THIS TO RUN OUR GAEM!!!!11" = steam

by **Cptschrodinger** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:59 pm

charris wrote:As we speak, I'm working on implementing update checking into ZDoom.

NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! Not Zsteam!

by **QBasicer** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:56 pm

As we speak, I'm working on implementing update checking into ZDoom.

by **Jim** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:47 pm

Graf Zahl wrote:
Chris wrote: You don't seem to trust a lot of Windows software, then (back when I had Zonealarm, it asked me about quite a few programs accessing the internet that I had no clue had been accessing it), yet you seem to still use Windows.

It is one thing not to trust certain software. But when it comes to Windows it is not that easy to dump it when you need it all the time for some reason. And before you ask, LInux is not an alternative because 90% of the software I use on a regular basis doesn't work with it.

And no, I do not trust Windows.

I just want to mention that people too often say that they cannot use Linux because it doesn't have the software they use. However, software itself is not important. The protocols and file formats that are supported (and more generally the functions that are easy to perform with some existing software) are what is important. Really, the only thing for which using similar software isn't really an acceptable substitute is games.

Graf, I am curious just what these things are that you can do in Windows that you cannot in Linux. I'm not saying that I don't believe you, but would you mind giving some examples (other than the obvious: games)?

by **Graf Zahl** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 3:02 am

Chris wrote: You don't seem to trust a lot of Windows software, then (back when I had Zonealarm, it asked me about quite a few programs accessing the internet that I had no clue had been accessing it), yet you seem to still use Windows.

It is one thing not to trust certain software. But when it comes to Windows it is not that easy to dump it when you need it all the time for some reason. And before you ask, LInux is not an alternative because 90% of the software I use on a regular basis doesn't work with it.

And no, I do not trust Windows.

by **Chris** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 8:38 pm

Graf Zahl wrote:The average n00b, who would probably ditch ZDoom if he got some buggy development betas from time to time, the developers who would keep their version up to date anyway or guys like you who apparently can't be bothered to check for updates manually?

First and third. And for the newb, we'd let those who like running the latest to check for bugs to give an "ok" before randy marks it as new on the server. Or perhaps, there could even be an option "check for latest development", "check for latest ok'd", "check for latest stable", and "don't check". It'd popup a box asking the first time you run a version that checks, and set a cvar.

So, things like Portage, GAIM, Guifications, and all those freeware apps that have auto-update notifications are just wasting their time?
Are those one-man niche products with a rather small user base or are they larger in scope and developed by bigger teams? That alone can make a big difference.

Portage is the only one that I'd say is developed by bigger teams.. and that may be questionable (depending on your definition of "bigger"). I can count the number of GAIM developers on my hands, and I'd be surprised if Guifications is more than one or two people (since it's only a plugin for GAIM).

No, Steam is the root of evil and I don't want to see even a small shred of it in ZDoom. I am highly suspicious of software that accesses the internet without asking me and I normally block those at first sight unless I really trust them - and that is rare.

You don't seem to trust a lot of Windows software, then (back when I had Zonealarm, it asked me about quite a few programs accessing the internet that I had no clue had been accessing it), yet you seem to still use Windows.

by **QBasicer** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 2:04 pm

I have bandwidth to burn.

by **Mannequin** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 2:03 pm

Why not just make a front-end that checks the lars directory, and notifies you if there is a higher version of ZDoom available?

This solves two problems:
1. The people who don't want it, don't have to download it.
2. The people who want it, get it.

This still has the problem of server over-activity, but if you program it to check once a week, month, or year it won't be as bad as every hour or every 24 hours.

(Geeze, it was tiring just reading this thread...

)

-M.

by **QBasicer** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 2:02 pm

Why can't we just the same principle for updates? It could at least *TELL* you there's an update.

by **Graf Zahl** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 1:52 pm

charris wrote: I have it set so that it pops up and says: "Hey you, you have an update." Acutally it's one of those balloons, but you get the picture. I wouldn't want anything to be set to install something that I don't know about, so I always review what it's installing.

Same here. Having this done automatically would give me the creeps.

by **QBasicer** » Sun Mar 27, 2005 1:20 pm

Then everybody will disable it and it will become useless.

That's up to the user, isn't it?

If the user can set it you have to calculate the stupidity factor - something Randy's Server might not like...

I guess we'll not use Randy's server then, will we?

Sadly, WindowsXP bugs me if I completely disable Windows Update so I have set it to the least intrusive setting that doesn't. I'd rather do it manually. I really don't like software that alters itself this way.

I have it set so that it pops up and says: "Hey you, you have an update." Acutally it's one of those balloons, but you get the picture. I wouldn't want anything to be set to install something that I don't know about, so I always review what it's installing.

ZDoom

Auto-Update

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Auto-Update